It seems we can always count on Justin to rack up a few more headlines, and front page pictures. He sees it as his job, being the face of Canada to the world. His narrative is that of a sanctimonious twat who gets to hector other nations to pull up their socks if they want to trade with Canada.

MANILA, PHILIPPINES—Rodrigo Duterte went “out on a limb” to secure a key invitation for Justin Trudeau to attend a prestigious Asia-Pacific security event alongside powerful world leaders, government officials say.

But one senior insider insists the Philippine president’s helpful gesture won’t have any impact on whether Trudeau confronts him about human-rights violations in the southeast Asian country that have shocked people around the world.

Trudeau has hinted he might bring up the issue of human rights with Duterte, if he gets the opportunity.

The leaders have no one-on-one meetings planned while the prime minister is visiting the Philippines for summits related to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Francisco Fernandez of the Philippines embassy in Ottawa says Canada asked for the invitation and Manila didn’t hesitate to grant it, in part because of trade and investment ties and in part because 837,000 people of Filipino descent live in Canada.

In this case, our embarrassing nag, Justin looks for a chance to embarrass the host, who has used his influence to get Trudeau a chair where he can play sanctimonious twat, while the serious people try to resolve differences and get closer to a real trade deal.

In diplomatic language, this kind of diplomatic move is known as a "stab in the back".

I cannot imagine how somebody so guileless could screw things up so badly ... all the while maintaining the air of whimsical innocence. Is there nobody in the LIberal party who knows how to play this game?

I keep thinking ... how does it go? First time as tragedy, second as farce?

'We don't know what Canada wants': Japanese chorus of confusion grows over Trudeau's TPP position'The (Japanese) prime minister was quite upset, from what I understand. And I think he has a reason to be moody,' a trade expert said
Marie-Danielle Smith
December 21, 2017
5:24 PM EST

TOKYO — Japan’s former ambassador to Canada has added his voice to those concerned that confusion over Ottawa’s position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership could affect the relationship between the two countries.

At last month’s Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Vietnam, Trudeau’s decision not to attend a meeting of leaders of the 11 countries negotiating the trade deal — a meeting which the other countries expected would finalize an agreement in principle — “grated on Japanese sensitivities,” said Sadaaki Numata, formerly Japan’s top diplomat in Canada and an advisor to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce Japan. And he said it has put the relationship into a holding pattern, with the Japanese waiting for an indication that Canada is still interested in moving forward with the deal.

“I am concerned that what happened recently might lead to a stasis in our relationship and that’s not good, that would not be very encouraging,” Numata said. “Certainly (Trudeau) may have been able to avoid a situation where people would call Canada’s attitude as something ‘unpredictable.’ … It’s true that the word ‘unpredictability’ is used in relation to (U.S. president) Donald Trump.”Trump’s withdrawal early in 2017 from the original group of 12 nations negotiating the TPP seemed to have buried the trade pact until the spring, when Japan, with support from Canada, resurrected talks focused on forging a deal without the United States.

Until the APEC incident, negotiators perceived that things were going smoothly, said Mitsuru Myochin, a counsellor with the Japanese government’s TPP team. “We still do not know why Canada changed their attitude,” he said

In the weeks leading up to the summit, the Canadian government had signalled to the country’s media that a deal in Vietnam was by no means assured, and in the wake of the leaders’ meeting he didn’t attend, Trudeau told Canadian reporters his reluctance to commit “should (have) come as no surprise and it actually didn’t come as a surprise to people who’d noticed that I was saying that and have been saying that all week.”

[....]

Trump’s withdrawal early in 2017 from the original group of 12 nations negotiating the TPP seemed to have buried the trade pact until the spring, when Japan, with support from Canada, resurrected talks focused on forging a deal without the United States.

Until the APEC incident, negotiators perceived that things were going smoothly, said Mitsuru Myochin, a counsellor with the Japanese government’s TPP team. “We still do not know why Canada changed their attitude,” he said

In the weeks leading up to the summit, the Canadian government had signalled to the country’s media that a deal in Vietnam was by no means assured, and in the wake of the leaders’ meeting he didn’t attend, Trudeau told Canadian reporters his reluctance to commit “should (have) come as no surprise and it actually didn’t come as a surprise to people who’d noticed that I was saying that and have been saying that all week.”
http://nationalpost.com/news/p.....p-position

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte says he wants to cancel a multimillion-dollar deal to buy 16 helicopters from Canada, just days after Ottawa ordered a review of the sale.

"So this is my reaction. I want to tell the armed forces to cut the deal ... and somehow we will look for another supplier. We respect the stand of Canada," he said during a media briefing Friday morning.

At one point during the briefing, Duterte asks someone in audience how many helicopters his country is buying from Canada.

"So from here on now, I am directing the armed forces of the Philippines, since most of the guns, bullets and whatever, weapons of war ... invariably to be used against the rebels and the terrorists, do not buy any more from Canada. Or from the United States, because there is always a condition attached," he said.

Earlier this week, Reuters reported the Philippines inked a $233-million deal to buy Montreal-built Bell helicopters. The Canadian Commercial Corporation, which facilitated the deal, wouldn't confirm the cost.

The Liberal government had defended the deal, which is being facilitated by the Canadian Commercial Corp., arguing the Montreal-built Bell helicopters would be used during search-and-rescue missions and disaster relief.

But International Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne announced Wednesday he had ordered a review of the deal, which was finalized in December, after a senior member of the Philippines military said the aircraft would also be used in "internal security operations."

"The president's troubling comments only underscore the confusion and contradictions that have emerged recently on the intended end use of the helicopters," said a spokesperson for Champagne on Friday.

Does this make any sense? We always do this kind of thing -- we will sell the Phillipines military equipment provided they check with the Canadian cabinet about who they use the equipment against? Or when thet pull up their socks when it comes to so-.called human rights.

This amounts to an interference in another country's domestic politics.

Stop posing, and sell them the equipment, fool! Or come out and support the rebels, at least verbally.

"So from here on now, I am directing the armed forces of the Philippines, since most of the guns, bullets and whatever, weapons of war ... invariably to be used against the rebels and the terrorists, do not buy any more from Canada. Or from the United States, because there is always a condition attached," he said.

"So from here on now, I am directing the armed forces of the Philippines, since most of the guns, bullets and whatever, weapons of war ... invariably to be used against the rebels and the terrorists, do not buy any more from Canada. Or from the United States, because there is always a condition attached," he said.

I'm sorry, but does this make a difference?

There was a time, TC, when I thought you had some elementary awareness of something called "law". You sure had me bamboozled.

Under the law, when you sell something, you give up the title. You can't specify how it is to be used. My point is that Canada should be honest. If the Government of the Philippines is willing to hire Canadians to build them some helicopters, what gives the boy-PM a veto on how that equipment can be used?

Most purchasing countries lie and most supplier countries avoid noticing the violations. The President of the Philippines is more direct than that. He simply wants an honest transaction. If the US does it too -- does that make it a good thing to do for Canada? (Besides, the Americans have some serious weapons of war. They might have a reason.)

As for Canada we should be glad we have a market for our helicopters just so we can keep involved in the technology.

It's just more of Justin's endless virtue-signalling ... the oozing smarm ... don't step in it, it isn't easy to get off.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum